camerapediafandomcom-20200215-history
User talk:Biofos
Welcome and howtos Hello Biofos. Welcome here. (I'm new here myself, but I'm accustomed to editing at Wikipedia and the processes there and here are almost the same.) Please put me right on the process/protocols. Since you invite this . . . first, the simple stuff: #When you add a comment to a talk page, either put it under an existing, relevant heading or add a new heading at the bottom and put it under that. #At the end, sign it, by typing "~~~~". Note that every contribution you make, even to a talk page, is thereby released as copyleft. (This warning to me is clearly visible on my screen while I am writing this.) I note that you say: The following has been translated from “Histoire de l'Appareil Photographique Olympus 1936 – 1983” by Dominique and Jean-Paul Francesch; by doing this, you are releasing this chunk of their book under the GFDL, and frankly I'd be very surprised if you have their permission to do this. (I haven't seen their book and of course it's imaginable that they copylefted it under GFDL and so your dissemination of part of it here is fully justified.) For now I shan't comment on the substance of what you say, as the user "Rebollo fr" is anyway sure to see it and to respond, and he'll be able to respond much more intelligently than I can. I hope you enjoy editing here. -- Hoary 02:43, 7 June 2006 (EDT) Response: Thanks for that. I read the C/R rules but assumed (wrongly) that the talk pages were not for general publication; so you are correct that I am in error re posting the translation of JP's page. Is there any way to remove this? As a writer and publisher myself I am very aware of C/R issues but not in this type of forum. I am unsure whether I will contribute further; much depends on other committments and if I feel comfortable. But I would like to see an accurate record of the company's history, if this is possible. I read a comment in the general discussion about 'opinion' merely being repeated by authors not undertaking their own careful research. It is this part that concerns me as I am very wary of expressing such without much justification. Please let me know about the C/R error. Thanks for your help. -- "~~~~" :Uh, well, you don't type the "nowiki" stuff, just the twiddle key ("~") four times in a row! :You're half right: the talk pages aren't intended for general publication. However, they're available for general publication. In practice, this is unlikely to happen, and I don't think you should worry about it so much. :The simplest thing for you to do now is just to delete the long quotation. Rebollo will have already read it (and anyway he has a copy of the book). :Course you'll feel comfortable editing here! But feel free to ease yourself in slowly if you like. Hoary 08:17, 7 June 2006 (EDT) (produced by four taps on the twiddle key) :You can remove the corresponding part by editing the talk page, the same way you did when posting for the first time. The extract will still appear in the history page of the talk page, accessible to the people that would really want to dig it up. (Personnally I do not know what is the copyright status of a content that has been removed from a page but is still in the page's history.) There might be a way to remove content from the history. It would be quite complicated, and I do not think that the extract is so significantly large as to justify it, but if you want, I can give it a try. :"I read a comment in the general discussion about 'opinion' merely being repeated by authors not undertaking their own careful research.": Which particular comment are you alluding to? It is certain that the current state of some articles is sketchy and only reflect the basic common knowledge (of course I include some of the articles that I wrote myself). This is especially true of the articles about a big company because, to be written up successfully, they need expertise about a long time period and about many very different camera models. In Camerapedia, there is a constant conflict between the need to fill out the most blatant voids (in order to present at least a decent Olympus page to the casual reader) and the slower pace of a careful research work. :Feel free to visit the site to get an idea of its good points and weaknesses. As Hoary said, I am sure you will have fun editing. --Rebollo fr 08:57, 7 June 2006 (EDT) ::The copyright status of what's available in the history would be unchanged. If you submit something under GFDL, it remains under GFDL, whether it's on display or only available with some searching. ::Biofos, I don't think you should worry. Just delete any part of your comment that you regret having made. (It's not as if you put in a whole chapter.) ::(Rebollo fr, it's very easy for you -- though not us plebs -- to delete any changes made to a page after a given time. I'll tell you more in email if you're interested.) Hoary 09:21, 7 June 2006 (EDT) :::Yes please explain! --Rebollo fr 09:34, 7 June 2006 (EDT) Welcome Hello and welcome here! I have answered to your post in the Olympus folders' talk page. --Rebollo fr 08:11, 7 June 2006 (EDT) Hi again chaps, I'm really busy at the moment though I have managed some additional research on the semi 1 and its transition to semi 2. I have some interesting stuff from my database but would prefer to discuss them off camerapedia - lesson learned! A lot of my stuff will be part of future books. Is this possible? If so perhaps you guys could email me direct john@biofos.com. Biofos 21:02, 11 June 2006 (EDT) :I think the simplest solution would be for you to correct the article where it needs correcting and amplify it where it needs amplifying, and to discuss any issues on the article's talk page. Nobody is expecting that you will release large chunks (or indeed small chunks) of your future books via GFDL; you can instead divulge only as much of their content (if any) as you wish. Meanwhile, if you do prefer to use email, note the link to the left on a user talk page: "E-mail this user". (Of course this only works if the user has chosen to supply his or her email address.) -- Hoary 23:09, 11 June 2006 (EDT) :Hello again, :As Hoary said, there is no need to insert any extract of your future book, or any other copyrighted material, just to discuss things and share information in the talk page(s). The first time you posted, the only problematic part was the extract from Francesch, and I have spent some work to erase it completely from camerapedia's database. If you want to refer to some other printed source, you can just give the reference and maybe a short resume of the contents without citing a big extract. :I won't accept any information that couldn't be published in camerapedia. If I was learning some interesting fact from you, but was not allowed to add it to the page because you don't want me to reveal a part of your future book, my position as an author of the page would be terrible. :We can discuss by private mail if you absolutely want to. You can contact me by following the link in my signature, then the "E-mail this user" link on the left of my user page. If you do so, I will consider that you have read this and accept the info contained in this mail exchange to be published here (of course citing your name as the source if this info was not already in my possession). :I am really sorry if I seem reluctant to enter in communication with you, I am just taking my precautions as an author and publisher whose research is under way, as you are doing yourself. :--Rebollo fr 05:44, 12 June 2006 (EDT) Purged the talk page from the copyrighted material Hello, I have deleted the copyrighted material from both the Olympus folders' talk page and from its change history. At least I removed the translation of the book by Francesch. In your post, there is also a description of your own camera, that is also comprised between QUOTE and END OF QUOTE. If this is a part of a future book and you want me to delete it too, just let me know. --Rebollo fr 11:57, 7 June 2006 (EDT) Hello Hoary and Rebollo fr, Firstly my sincere thanks to Rebollo fr for removing the C/R material - I am very much obliged. In the light of Rebollo fr's remarks of 12 June 2006 above I am considering my position. Biofos 20:09, 14 June 2006 (EDT)